Is Vegas 8?

[Wade Harrington]

Why in the world would sony ever support the Panasonic?.. They are trying to sell the XDCAM’s.

[Douglas Spotted eagle]

The lack of support for DVCPro HD has zero relationship to Sony selling XDCAM or any other format camcorder.
Panasonic chooses to whom they’ll give the codec licenses to and whom they’ll charge big bucks.
If it had anything to do with who is selling what cameras, why do you suppose that Adobe only announced DVCProHD support last week, yet it’s one of the very popular NLE systems? The only reason Adobe now has DVCProHD is because of their acquisition of Serious Magic. Otherwise, one could easily bet the farm that Adobe never would have had DVCProHD support due to the cost of the license. Some manufacturers allegedly paid nothing for DVCProHD licensing. I don’t know if that is accurate or not, but I’m positive regarding the cost of the license to some developers.
Aside from that, DVCProHD is effectively dead, just like everything else DV-based. AVC-I is their next big thing, as Grass Valley is now J2K and Sony is XDCAM.

[Christopher Wright]

“Aside from that, DVCProHD is effectively dead…”
You better not tell that to the Motu people. They are betting the farm on DVCPROHD exclusively!!
So I guess the answer is, no DVCPROHD support in Vegas except through Raylight…

[Marc Istook]

That doesn’t seem to make sense. P2 workflows don’t just encompass DVCProHD — they also include anything shot using DVCPro50 or DV — both of which you can shoot on Panasonic’s HVX-200 camera on P2 cards, or on regular DVCPro/MiniDV tapes and then ingest to Vegas traditionally. So it would seem to me that it’s not a codec issue — it’s a P2 issue.

Responding to: —The lack of support for DVCPro HD has zero relationship to Sony selling XDCAM or any other format camcorder.
Panasonic chooses to whom they’ll give the codec licenses to and whom they’ll charge big bucks.
If it had anything to do with who is selling what cameras, why do you suppose that Adobe only announced DVCProHD support last week, yet it’s one of the very popular NLE systems? The only reason Adobe now has DVCProHD is because of their acquisition of Serious Magic. Otherwise, one could easily bet the farm that Adobe never would have had DVCProHD support due to the cost of the license. Some manufacturers allegedly paid nothing for DVCProHD licensing. I don’t know if that is accurate or not, but I’m positive regarding the cost of the license to some developers.
Aside from that, DVCProHD is effectively dead, just like everything else DV-based. AVC-I is their next big thing, as Grass Valley is now J2K and Sony is XDCAM.—

[Christopher Wright]

Yes I didn’t correct DSE on his post, but the majority of DVCPROHD work is done in Quicktime direct digital transfer from Firestore FS-100 drives or P2 card mxf metadata. I really don’t know any people working with DVCPROHD that are even bothering with decks and firewire anymore. And DVCPROHD is far from even having a hiccup, much less being “dead.”

[Jan Crittenden livingston]

[DSE/Spot] “Panasonic chooses to whom they’ll give the codec licenses to and whom they’ll charge big bucks.”

In all situations where the implementation is well done, it is a partnership, they choose, we choose. It is not us just choosing, it is a business decision. Yes, there is a rivalry between Sony and Panaosnic, fortunately the Raylight product allows it to use P2, and DVCPRO HD. And that is a good thing as in this one case I believe the rivalry would not let any thing else transpire, from either side.

[DSE/Spot] “If it had anything to do with who is selling what cameras, why do you suppose that Adobe only announced DVCProHD support last week, yet it’s one of the very popular NLE systems? The only reason Adobe now has DVCProHD is because of their acquisition of Serious Magic.”

This helped them of course but they also have been working eith Panasonic as otherwise it would not have been possible, at least this soon. Note it was not just DVCPRO HD support but also P2.

[DSE/Spot] “Aside from that, DVCProHD is effectively dead, just like everything else DV-based. AVC-I is their next big thing, as Grass Valley is now J2K and Sony is XDCAM.”

And this is the statement that brought me to this thread. You are so incredibly wrong about this. AVC-I is a new codec for us, and you know that is a good thing. But in no way shape or form does it quantify that DVCPRO or any of its derivatives are dead as you say. You should really keep your commentary to things you know rather than putting words out there that are so outstandingly incorrect. We have brought three new cameras to the market this year, all of them do DVCPRO HD. Two of them do AVC-Intra. This is a new codec, there is development that has to happen in order for it to be fully supported like DVCPRO/50/HD are.

There are tens of thousands of DVCPRO HD cameras and we will hit well over 100,000 before it is over and maybe even several hundred thousand. When something works, why break it.

Thanks,

Jan

Jan Crittenden Livingston
Product Manager, DVCPRO, DVCPRO50, AG-DVX100
Panasonic Broadcast & TV Systems

[Douglas Spotted eagle]

When something works, why break it.
I guess the same thing could be said about using solar energy vs coal-fired power, or even using tape vs solid-state storage.
We both know that in comparison to developments over the past decade, and specifically over the past few years, DVCPro is an inefficient codec. I clearly recall a conversation with Phil in which we discussed this very point, which is why Panasonic (like everyone else) is always looking for that next great thing. So from your statement, I assume we’ll be seeing a new version of DVCProHD sometime soon as development on the codec hasn’t ended? I’m apparently misinformed when I’m told development of DVCProHD was mature, based on your comments.

P2, IMO, is a wonderful thing although drastically overpriced (again by comparison to what else is available).
DV/HDV tape-$0.25 per GB
XDCAM-$1.10 per GB
Infinity-$2.25 per GB
HDD-$18.00 per GB
P2-$67.00 per GB

Jan Crittenden Livingston And that is a good thing as in this one case I believe the rivalry would not let any thing else transpire, from either side.

We both know that Vegas would have liked to support the DVCProHD codec and P2. The ability to support is not from the Vegas side of the issue.

[Jan Crittenden livingston]

[DSE/Spot] “I guess the same thing could be said about using solar energy vs coal-fired power, or even using tape vs solid-state storage.”

This is true, but coal vs. solar is irrelevant to whether we are dumping the DVCPRO CODEC as it does work and works very well. Fact is we have both Tape and Solid State cameras that use it, as we have customers that have both and appreciate that they are able to migrate to solid state on the same algorithm.

[DSE/Spot] “We both know that in comparison to developments over the past decade, and specifically over the past few years, DVCPRO is an inefficient codec.”

From our perscpective efficiency is not the key priority when doing acquisition because whatever you give away at that point is gone. This is not the appropriate time to give away the farm. Is it an efficient delivery or say distribution codec? Not really, but for distribution I would use something like a Long GOP format for delivery and save my I-Frame codec for the acquisition and Production part of the programming. In that domain it is efficient. The only other more efficient I Frame CODEC would be the AVC-Intra, not to be confused with AVCHD which is the same long GOP nature of HDV or XDCam HD.

[DSE/Spot] “I clearly recall a conversation with Phil in which we discussed this very point, which is why Panasonic (like everyone else) is always looking for that next great thing.”

Since I was married to Phil, I can only imagine that he would have framed this in the above context or you missed the fact that he framed it in this context. Yes some of what comes out of AVC-Intra is fewer bits but not so outrageously so, it is still 50Mbs for DVCPRO HD quality.

[DSE/Spot] “So from your statement, I assume we’ll be seeing a new version of DVCProHD sometime soon as development on the codec hasn’t ended? I’m apparently misinformed when I’m told development of DVCProHD was mature, based on your comments.”

The DVCPRO HD Codec is mature, I didn’t say we were still in development. Read my words, we are still delivering cameras based on the codec, not making new developments in the codec and will continue to do so over the next however many years. Customers will let us know when to stop delivering cameras.

[DSE/Spot] “P2, IMO, is a wonderful thing although drastically overpriced (again by comparison to what else is available).
DV/HDV tape-$0.25 per GB
XDCAM-$1.10 per GB
Infinity-$2.25 per GB
HDD-$18.00 per GB
P2-$67.00 per GB .”

Here is where you are just comparing a very old and rather staid argument as if the P2 were the storage medium. Please look at it as data and it can indeed have the same storage cost as that HDD above(although probably less as the drives I have purchased recently seem to cost significantly less than this) or as low as the cost of 4 GBs on a DVD. Every time you use the P2 card, the cost of that GB goes down as the useage is divided against the cost. So the same thing could be said for DVCPRO tape at $1.00 a minute, and I thought that was the most expensive. I guess I needed to do a market check. So I repeat, as will any of the folks that use P2, it is not a storage medium, it is a transitional media to something vastly less expensive.

[DSE/Spot] “We both know that Vegas would have liked to support the DVCProHD codec and P2. The ability to support is not from the Vegas side of the issue.”

Of course we do, and I am grateful to Marcus Van Bavel at DV Film for creating the third party handshake as it resolves an unresolveable issue between two giants in the industry.

Best,

Jan

[Douglas Spotted eagle]

Jan Crittenden Livingston From our perscpective efficiency is not the key priority when doing acquisition because whatever you give away at that point is gone.

Completely understood. Kinda like trying to turn 960 x 540 into 1920 x 1080. It’s gone, so you can never recover it properly.
Apparently we’re caught in semantics. DVCProHD isn’t enjoying any further development, improvement, nor change. Developmentally, it’s dead. So is HDV. So is Beta and VHS. Whether it’s still implemented in product is a different conversation.
Either way, it’s not germaine to the Vegas discussion. The OP simply needed clarification as to why Vegas doesn’t offer P2 and DVCProHD support, and the suggestion was that Sony Creative Software didn’t support the codec/format because they are pushing XDCAM, and that simply isn’t true, regardless of how it’s spun. I know from personal discussions with both sides of the issue, that the lack of support is due to a decision made on one side of the fence, not the other. It is what it is, but the lack cannot be put down to a relationship between various entities of the Sony umbrella.
The sad thing is that it shortchanges everyone by not having direct support for the format in Vegas, and it’s an unfair burden on users. It’s not honest nor appropriate to spin it
differently.

[Dr.dropout]

Hi all-

I’m not going to participate in any ensuing debates (if there are any) but I do have a few comments, hopefully they will all be seen in a positive light.

First, as a lot of people here know, we have really good DVX100 24p support in Vegas, and that is actively maintained and will continue to be maintained in Vegas (Pro version) for the foreseeable future.

Second, we’re very happy that several of our partners have written plug-ins or helper apps that allow the use of DVCPro/P2 material in Vegas. We’ve assisted all parties who have requested/needed help with finishing the implementation, and we have continuously pointed customers to these solutions, and will continue to do so. I personally did this several times at the IBC ’07 show in Amsterdam, at our Vegas 8 launch event last week.

Third, if Panasonic themselves would like to create a plug-in in order to ensure that P2 or any of their other present or future products works in our software, we offer an sdk and developer assistance, free of charge. Quite a few non-Sony companies have taken advantage of our plug-in technologies and I think as a general rule it can be said that it has worked out well for everybody- us, the manufacturer, and the end customer. In the P2 case there are already GREAT 3rd party solutions that work very well (thanks partners!), but as other formats come online it might be worth implementing “factory support” from the device manufacturer, or perhaps contracting with one of our partners to do the work(I can provide contacts on request).

To be crystal clear about competitive concerns, there is NO objection on our part to have Panasonic products work in Vegas or any of other SCS product, and I don’t consider Panasonic compatibility of any type “unresolveable”, at least from our perspective. True, anything that requires development and support funding of course is a business decision, that’s well understood. In such cases we hope the maker of the device/format will be willing to pitch in on development/testing/support to ensure that their products work with ours. This request shouldn’t been seen as abnormal or in any way bad I don’t think, especially in the current landscape of constant new formats that we now all find ourselves in. I’d like to point out within Sony the company we do this all the time- Sony camera groups routinely do custom support implementation with other-branded NLEs and apps in the interest of ensuring broad/timely possible support of their new formats. I think that is a wise decision on the part of our camera/format groups and should continue, and I think every device and format maker should try to do that and follow that model- really, it can only sell more product and make customers happy, which is all we should care about.

I’m not going to put my email here for spam reasons but if somebody from Panasonic calls our front desk they’ll put you through to my direct line and maybe we can figure something out. No objections on this end to moving forward at any level.

Regardless of how it works out between the “big companies”, one more Huzzah! for our valued partners, please check them out if you haven’t already (www.DVfilm.com and http://www.Cineform.com).

cheers-

Dave Hill
VP Technology
Sony Creative Software
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com